Taxation
Expert
Warns Sun City
Anthem
Subsidized
Restaurant Will Create Tax Problems
by
Linda
Kaplan
Master of Science in
Taxation
Former Special Enrolled
Agent
Internal Revenue
Service
(the highest
credential awarded by IRS)
My Fellow SCA property
owners. It has come to my attention that the SCA Board of Directors is
attempting to pass a resolution changing Policy and Procedures to
enable SCA to provide financial assistance to a proposed restaurant.
This is an extremely DANGEROUS proposal for
numerous
reasons.
I believe that SCA files with the Internal Revenue Service as an
F1120H entity.
Simply stated this means that the IRS considers this entity as a Not for Profit Condo Association.
The IRS Code and Regulations that govern this type of filing which
includes but is not limited to IRC 401(c), not for profit rules become applicable.
These rules strictly DISALLOW
this type of entity to support or finance a for-profit entity like a
Restaurant.
If this proposed resolution is adopted, SCA will LOSE its
not-for-profit status.
SCA will then be required to file as a C Corporation, F1120, resulting in a higher tax obligation creating an unnecessary additional cost.
SCA will then be required to file as a C Corporation, F1120, resulting in a higher tax obligation creating an unnecessary additional cost.
I have been a tax accountant most of my adult life, earning an MST (Master of Science
inTaxation) from Fairleigh Dickenson
University.
In addition, after many years of running my own
practice, I took a position with the IRS as an Internal Revenue
Agent.
My duties as an agent included:
Auditing multiple tax
entities.
Classification work (an agent makes
a professional judgement call on a specific tax return determining if an entity
requires a full audit).
IRS certified instructor, teaching
revenue agents how to perform audits in compliance with the tax
code.
In addition, I am a Special Enrolled
Agent (federally authorized practitioner).
Enrolled agent status is the highest credential awarded by the IRS.
If this resolution passes requiring all clubs to use
this restaurant exclusively, there are a number of
serious concerns which need to be
addressed.
Financially supporting this restaurant will be an unnecessary
additional cost to SCA property
owners.
How would this new restaurant accommodate seating especially during
the holiday season? There are over 60 clubs; double the amount of days in the
month of December.
Once this precedent is established we would be
granting an unfair practice in prohibiting
clubs from using Buckmans or any other
establishment.
What would prevent Buckmans in requesting similar financial
assistance?
For the reasons enumerated above, I am requesting that we make it
abundantly clear that this proposal is only creating more of a
financial problem for SCA owners and should NOT be
passed.
Respectfully yours,
Linda Kaplan, MST, EA
Send your comments to:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Anthem Opinions is aware there are differing opinions on this matter, and we encourage comments to support or disagree with Ms. Kaplan.Send your comments to:
I don't know of one person who wants any part of subsidizing a restaurant again!
And certainly not so they can raise our dues to do it.
What is wrong with these people?!
There should certainly be some kind of community vote on this.. but more likely the board and Sandy will just go ahead and do it.
So wrong!
I don't know where Linda gets her information but 401(c) rules deal with self employed individuals and owner-employees.
Ain't Google a wonderful thing?
Just read the other blogger about his call for people not to support the recall.
What a joke. As usual, no names and never addressing the issues set forth in the petitions.
Those people (if they exist), are complaining about those who support the recall, yet their source of information is a blogger with a history of dishonesty who won't even publish the contents of the petitions. All he does is condemn the messengers, and never addresses the message.
What kind of people come to conclusions when they don't even know what they are condemning?
Can't wait until one of them calls me so I can ask them to prove the allegations are false, much less even be able to tell me what they are.
Obviously the board does not have these qualities or experiences (except one). How would I know (?), easy, time....We have seen so many irrational decisions we become amazed in the infinite lack of wisdom they display. They tout their experiences as though it is displayed as gospel, but it hasn't worked, has it?
Scott,
That not completely true.
Did you check the IRS CODE AND REGULATIONS ?
I COULD SENT YOU THEM IF YOU ARE INTERESTED. GOGGLE IS GREAT BUT DOES NOT GO INTO DETAIL.
This info is incomplete.
There are IRS CODES AND REGULATIONS that take this issue to a higher level specifically which has to be addressed.
Don't allow yourself to be the brunt of the typical harassment that blogger has employed for years by pestering anyone who disagrees with him.
I'm sure he's checked every address in the community to find you in order to contact you.
That's his typical mode of operation in his delusional world of self-importance; however, your comment is valid about addressing the issues.
He has never printed anything about the contents of the removal petitions, much less anything as to the their validity. To do so would actually inform his dwindling readers of what is actually going on.
All you ever see is just "kill the messenger", his latest target being Director Nona Tobin.
Strange that he was the first to report the receipt of the petitions before the Association President or General Manager did.
He obviously has a mole somewhere in Sun City Anthem that informed him that the petitions were received.
And...it's been six days and still nothing of any official word from the Association President or General Manager.
It would seem that news would justify a mass eblast informing the unit owners of the received petitions.
Why would there be no mass elbast in that regard?
The Association Treasurer certainly wasted no time in sending one out when they got wind of the removal, didn't they?
And the Activities Director, Bartle, also wasted little time forwarding that same email to the presidents of clubs asking them to share it with their members as well.
Yet nothing "official" from those who promised "to keep us informed". What hypocrites !
Is there any one out there who actually believes any of this is some kind of coincidence?
It's just an obvious stonewalling technique from corrupt individuals to avoid informing the community of the severity of the problems uncovered and their unwillingness to confront the accusations.
That's what corrupt people do to protect a corrupt system they have embraced for years.
Anyone who believes otherwise needs a class in common sense.